Forum Help

If you want to ask about changing your username, have login problems, have password problems or a technical issue please email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com

Posting help:

If you want to ask why a word can't be typed, your signature's been changed, or a post has been deleted see the Forum Rules. If you don't find the answer you can ask forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com though due to volumes we can't guarantee replies.

The circumstances regarding this are quite a long story so I will keep it short and to the point as much as I can. Last june I was assaulted to the extent I received blows to my head and was knocked unconscious. When I cane around I summoned immediate medical attention by way of calling for a ambulance. Due to having been an assault the police were requested to attend with the ambulance staff. I was transfered to hospital and confirmed as having concussion and was kept there until the following afternoon. Whlist I was at hospital my partner returned home and realised I was not home it was late on a weekend night. He noticed my laptop charger was plugged in and my case on the sofa but no laptop there. He went upstairs into our bedroom and noticed our chest of drawers disturbed and two other laptops had gone. Also my small jewelery box was on the floor at the side of my dressing table empty. A neighbour knocked to tell him I had been taken away by ambulance and the police has asked some neighbours had they seen or heard anything
When he got to the hospital he told me about the missing things and we both concluded the person who assaulted me took them whilst I was unconscious. We reported the theft the following day by phone to the police who had already logged the assault the previous night and they gave us a crime reference number. We then got in touch with our insurers to put forward a claim. Some weeks later the police told us someone had come forward with information regarding the attacker and had taken them in for questioning. Our insurer sent a independent assessor to see us regarding the claim. We have been told our claim wI'll only be paid out if they can retrieve the costs back from the attacker. Is this right.

Sorry if I have come across as rude to some but I have never made a theft claim before and it's blooming stressful. Yes my insurer upon taking out the policy with them 6 years ago did ask if I had any valuables worth over two thousand pounds which were my wedding and engagement rings. My insurer then listed them separately on the policy but they have never informed me in writing or otherwise of the upper limit they will pay for each item in the event of a claim. I haven't purchased any jewellery for a long time but as I say a quick look at most high street jewellers sites and the average is around six to seven thousand for a similar solitaire ring. I don't expect my insurer to give me the equivalent of a two or three carat for example so it's not like I'm trying to get a Mercedes when I only had a ford fiesta in the first place so to speak. I have not specified the earrings or any other item of jewellery to them simply because they were not purchased for over two thousand pounds compared to my wedding jewels. So it's not as though I am trying to rip my insurers off I just want a fair settlement to be able to buy a equivalent replacement of the stolen items. I have said that I'm happy to settle the claim with vouchers or a card so I can just go into a few stores and then choose my replacements. But I don't see why I should be limited to a single store. Surely insurance companies are able to access vouchers or cards that can be redeemed at a variety of jewellers instead of just one store.

F. Hinds are a well established, old company and highly likely to have better quality jewellelry than h. samual et al. BUT the insurance company may be trying to get away with paying less to settle, that's what they all do for all types of claims.

I would look if there is a hinds close to you and pop in, ask them what a ring similar to what you had would cost.

Also is the 4k just for the ring? Also have you allowed for any excess you will need to pay?

Ali x

"Overthinking every little thing
Acknowledge the bell you cant unring"

Yes my insurer upon taking out the policy with them 6 years ago did ask if I had any valuables worth over two thousand pounds which were my wedding and engagement rings. My insurer then listed them separately on the policy but they have never informed me in writing or otherwise of the upper limit they will pay for each item in the event of a claim.

If the insurer has listed them separately on the policy then it sounds like they've been specified which is good news. You're first bet would be to ask the insurer what the wedding and engagement rings are specified for, as this will go a long way to establishing the correct valuation of the claim.

I would also ask the insurer to provide catalogue references / weblinks etc. for the like-for-like replacements. This will be your best bet for refuting their offer if you're unhappy - you can't refute it if you don't know how they've not come to that figure!

So get a breakdown of the 4k settlement and take it from there.

The insurer may have alternative suppliers with which you could use a voucher, or it may be just F. Hinds - it's always worth asking. In my opinion F. Hinds do a decent job, but everyone's different. If they only offer a voucher scheme for F. Hinds & you're not keen, you're best bet would be to ask for the cash. This will be a slightly reduced figure than the voucher value (as the insurer gets a discount through their supplier, i.e., F. Hinds) however gives you a load more freedom. There's no real argument against it, regrettably; the policy will state somewhere that the insurer may use their own appointed supplier and it's up to them what settlement options / routes to offer.

I phoned a local branch of f hinds not long ago. They did say that they have different ranges of diamond rings and it is the quality of the stone eg the clarity and if the cut is excellent which determines the price. They said a ring similar to the one I had in the same metal and carat weight ranges from three to six and a half thousand pounds with the colour and clarity of the stones determing the price. The same applies to my wedding band and earrings. The manager did tell me that she would be very surprised if the insurer gave me vouchers for a specific store as she did say most customers going through their insurance are given a gemcheck card with the agreed amount loaded onto the card. This card can be used to purchase items at nearly every chain of high street jewellers and I won't have to spend the amount all in one go eg I could buy my replacement rings from hinds then go to say leslie davies at another time and buy the earrings from there if I wanted to. This lady was m

Evening all, have been reading with interest because I am in a similar situation myself. I lost my late Mums 2 diamond rings, but only one was mentioned on my insurance and at a lesser value than the actual valuation because I thought I had lost the certificate for it. So I put the value at £1500 although I know it was valued at £1995 30 years ago as I fully intended to get a proper valuation. This is because the insurance states anything above £1500 must be mentioned separately.I subsequently found the valuation later. Unfortunately although it has been valued by the assessors at £3200 the insurers are only paying me £1500 before deduction of the excess. The other ring I didnt mention as I assumed it was worth less than £1500 which was stupid of me as I can now see replacements for similar 2 rings amounts to more than £5000. For this ring I have been offered £950 before excess and payment will be in vouchers which I have to use in H Samuel or Ernest Jones. Now upon looking at both these websites I can see that I wont even be able to buy 1 decent ring for this feeble amount of money. I have refused to accept these valuations so far but they seem immoveable so I will try the onbudsman and hope to get a more sympathetic ear. If they gave me cash I would be happy to replace them with 2 second hand rings as that is the only way to get something like the values I think.
Does anyone think the ombudsman would be sympathetic in this case.
TIA

It's worth asking your insurer to confirm which items they have seen which are a like-for-like match to the ones which were lost / stolen, however it would have been up to you to ensure that the valuations on the policy were up to date I'm afraid.

It's your job to make sure you're adequately covered for the items you wish to insure, not your insurer's job.

It's worth asking your insurer to confirm which items they have seen which are a like-for-like match to the ones which were lost / stolen, however it would have been up to you to ensure that the valuations on the policy were up to date I'm afraid.

It's your job to make sure you're adequately covered for the items you wish to insure, not your insurer's job.

Thanks but they are meant to be replacement value but I wont get even one ring with what they are offering, and yes I was very careless but had no idea that the value would have gone up so much. My own fault as you said.

I'm really sorry to hear that chocoholic. Yes I think you should contact the ombudsman you have been treated terribly. My policy states new for old on replacements which includes jewellery. A ring which cost almost three thousand twenty years for example would be impossible to replace on a like for like basis today for the original purchase price. If I was only given the original purchase price and had to go to say ernest jones I would be very lucky if I got a quarter carat stone in white gold. I'm told that my insurer must provide enough so that I can buy a ring of the same stone carat and metal purity which would be impossible if I only received the original putchase cost less my excess too. I don't want to disclose who my insurer is on here because I'm concerned they could use it against me. If you bought a house for fifty thousand twenty years ago you certainly couldn't now and it's the same for jewellery too.

I'm really sorry to hear that chocoholic. Yes I think you should contact the ombudsman you have been treated terribly. My policy states new for old on replacements which includes jewellery. A ring which cost almost three thousand twenty years for example would be impossible to replace on a like for like basis today for the original purchase price. If I was only given the original purchase price and had to go to say ernest jones I would be very lucky if I got a quarter carat stone in white gold. I'm told that my insurer must provide enough so that I can buy a ring of the same stone carat and metal purity which would be impossible if I only received the original putchase cost less my excess too. I don't want to disclose who my insurer is on here because I'm concerned they could use it against me. If you bought a house for fifty thousand twenty years ago you certainly couldn't now and it's the same for jewellery too.

The point of insurance for specific valuable items e.g. jewellery is that you must insure them for an appropriate amount.
In chocaholic's situation, she insured a ring that had an insurance value of £1995 30 years ago at £1500! That's three-quarters of a 30 year old valuation!

I can't see the ombudsman being amenable to rule in her favour when she had valued the ring at £1500 and that's what the insurance are willing to pay out (less any excess).

“

It's worth asking your insurer to confirm which items they have seen which are a like-for-like match to the ones which were lost / stolen, however it would have been up to you to ensure that the valuations on the policy were up to date I'm afraid.

It's your job to make sure you're adequately covered for the items you wish to insure, not your insurer's job.

I'm told that my insurer must provide enough so that I can buy a ring of the same stone carat and metal purity which would be impossible if I only received the original putchase cost less my excess too.

Your insurer must provide enough so that you are in the same position as you were pre-loss WITHIN YOUR POLICY LIMITS. If I could put that in multi-coloured 50pt font with fireworks coming off it that still wouldn't be enough emphasis.

Your insurance policy is a contract between yourself & your insurer for how the insurer will indemnify you (i.e., put you back in the same position should an insurable event occur). You are signing this contract & agreeing to it; it is up to you to ensure that this contract is suitable for your needs if you should ever need to claim. That's why you're always given 14 days to cancel it at no charge in case you find it not to be suitable.

FoS is a wonderful service which prioritises fairness above all else. Your insurer has acted perfectly fairly in this case I'm afraid.

And in particular read case study 121-6, at the bottom of the page, which seems rather similar to Chocaholic's case - and provided the insurer made clear to the customer that they needed to ensure the jewellery was insured for an adequate amount the Ombudsman would be unlikely to uphold a complaint.

Thanks but they are meant to be replacement value but I wont get even one ring with what they are offering, and yes I was very careless but had no idea that the value would have gone up so much. My own fault as you said.

I called into a local branch of f hinds yesterday to see if I could determine the quality of some of their items compared to the ones which were stolen. The manager was quick to assure me that higher quality diamonds compared to those in the window display were available to order depending on the sum involved. I have taken that into consideration but I also noticed that the earrings which could be of a similar style to the ones I had were no where in comparison with them.mine where very high quality mappin and webb whilst the nearest in style from hinds were flimsy and the stones not as well cut and set.

How this site works

We think it's important you understand the strengths and limitations of the site. We're a journalistic website and aim to provide the best MoneySaving guides, tips, tools and techniques, but can't guarantee to be perfect, so do note you use the information at your own risk and we can't accept liability if things go wrong.

This info does not constitute financial advice, always do your own research on top to ensure it's right for your specific circumstances and remember we focus on rates not service.

Do note, while we always aim to give you accurate product info at the point of publication, unfortunately price and terms of products and deals can always be changed by the provider afterwards, so double check first.

We don't as a general policy investigate the solvency of companies mentioned (how likely they are to go bust), but there is a risk any company can struggle and it's rarely made public until it's too late (see the Section 75 guide for protection tips).

We often link to other websites, but we can't be responsible for their content.

Always remember anyone can post on the MSE forums, so it can be very different from our opinion.

MoneySavingExpert.com is part of the MoneySupermarket Group, but is entirely editorially independent. Its stance of putting consumers first is protected and enshrined in the legally-binding MSE Editorial Code.